1 E.g., Merrills, A. H. (ed.), Vandals, Romans, and Berbers: new perspectives on late antique North Africa (Aldershot 2004)Google Scholar; Castritius, H., Die Vandalen (Stuttgart 2007)Google Scholar; Leone, A., Changing townscapes in North Africa from late antiquity to the Arab conquest (Bari 2007)Google Scholar, and Sears, G., Late Roman African urbanism (BAR S1693; Oxford 2007)Google Scholar, both reviewed by Miles, R. in JRA 23 (2010) 799–801 Google Scholar; Schwarcz, G. M. and Steinacher, R. (edd.), Das Reich der Vandalen und seine (Vor-)Geschichten (Wien 2008)Google Scholar; the exhibition catalogue, Badische Landesmuseum Karlsruhe, Erben des Imperiums in Nordafrika. Das Königreich der Vandalen (Mainz 2009)Google Scholar, and Merrills, A. and Miles, R., The Vandals (Chichester 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, both reviewed by Stevens, S. T. in JRA 25 (2012) 950-53Google Scholar; Conant, J., Staying Roman: conquest and identity in Africa and the Mediterranean 439-700 (Cambridge 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, reviewed by R. Whelan in the present issue.

2 Delestre, X., Hippone (Aix-en-Provence 2005)Google Scholar.

3 Mattingly, D. et al., Farming the desert. The UNESCO Libyan Valleys Archaeological Survey vol. 2. Gazetteer and pottery (Paris 1996)Google Scholar.

4 For a comparison of results of N African surveys, see Fentress, E. et al., “Accounting for ARS: fineware and sites in Sicily and Africa,” in Cherry, J. and Alcock, S. (edd.), Side-by-side survey: comparative regional studies in the Mediterranean (Oxford 2004) 147-62Google Scholar.

5 Fentress, E., Drine, A. and Holod, R., An island through time. Jerba studies 1: The Punic and Roman periods (JRA Suppl. 71, 2009) 206-10Google Scholar.

6 Bonifay, M. et al., “Le littoral de la Tunisie: études géoarchéologique et historique (1987-1997). La céramique,” AntAfr 38-39 (2002-2003) 128-32CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Slim, H., Trousset, P., Paskoff, R. and Oueslati, A., Le littoral de la Tunisie: études géoarchéologique et historique (Paris 2004)Google Scholar.

7 Stone, D. L., Mattingly, D. J. and Lazreg, N. Ben, Leptiminus (Lamta), report no. 3. The field survey (JRA Suppl. 87, 2011) 198-99 and 266 Google Scholar.

8 Brown, P., Authority and the sacred: aspects of the Christianisation of the Roman world (Cambridge 1995) 12 Google Scholar; O’Donnell, J. J., “The demise of paganism,” Traditio 35 (1979) 45–88 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lepelley, C., “Le lieu des valeurs communes: la cité terrain neutre entre païens et chrétiens dans l’Afrique romaine tardive,” in Inglebert, H. (ed.), Idéologies et valeurs civiques dans le monde romain. Hommage à Claude Lepelley (Paris 2002) 271-85Google Scholar.

9 For the general context, cf. Métraux, G. P. R., “Mosaics, liturgy and architecture in the Basilica of Dermech I, Carthage,” in Paunier, D. and Schmidt, C. (edd.), La mosaïque gréco-romaine VIII. Actes du VIIIeme Congrès int., Lausanne 1997 (= Cahiers d’archéologie romande 85-86 [2001]) 434-43, figs. 1-9Google Scholar. G. P. R. Métraux kindly provides the following information: “The statue was found in a purposedug pit at the base of the NW wall of the basilica, in a space which had previously been a service area behind the NW apse in its original construction (late 4th-early 5th c.). In the 6th c., the basilica was redesigned: its NW apse was dismantled, the nave and double aisles extended by two bays, and a new mosaic floor was ultimately laid throughout the building. Before the floor was laid, the pit was dug into the natural soil (sandy orange earth with some lime inclusions) on the axis of the SE apse and the newly repositioned altar and solea of the 6th-c. basilica. The pit measured c.70 × 65 cm and c.70 cm deep. Its cover included patches of burning and pieces of broken wall- and floorveneer of various marbles and some alabaster; a piece of marble veneer from the cover at the top of the pit matched an ancient break on a fragment found toward the bottom of the pit.

The contents of the pit included 2 small fragments of architectural marble (pilaster capital, colonnette) and some pieces of marble or alabaster veneer. Its main contents (60%) were the head, upper left quadrant of the torso, lower right quadrant of the hip and legs, and both feet standing on a base of waves with a dolphin holding a fish in its beak. The type is that of the Venus Callipyge (Venus Landolina, Venus of Syracuse). The statue was life-sized (1.92 m including base of 0.135 m) and of very high quality. Its ears were pierced for earrings and its hair red-boled for gilding. Its style suggests a date in the Hadrianic-early Antonine period. Other than the damage from the deliberate destruction of the statue, the fragments are fresh and clean, suggesting that it had stood in a protected, possibly interior, space. The destruction of the statue was systematic and appears to have involved attacks on the standing statue with a sledge-hammer, followed by chisel-and-mallet grooves to further divide the bigger fragments into quarters and to chop off the cheek of one of its buttocks. The pieces of the roughly-quartered statue were then thrown into the pit alternating with shovel-fulls of earth and mortar. Some burning then occurred over the filled-in pit, and the broken pieces of marble and alabaster were thrown over it.

The mosaic floor of the basilica in its 6th-c. redesign was then laid over the pit, obliterating its presence and contents. The digging of the pit, the breaking of the statue, and the filling of the pit appear to have been one continuous coordinated activity. There are indications of an adjacent pit (not excavated) which may contain other fragments of the statue and/or other materials. The destruction of the statue occurred within the context of the redesign and re-flooring of the Dermech I basilica.”

10 E.g., Ennabli, L., Carthage: une métropole chrétienne du IVe à la fin du VIIe siècle (Paris 1997)Google Scholar; Markus, R. A., The end of ancient Christianity (Cambridge 1990) 15 Google Scholar.